OBAMA’S CYNICAL ACTION WAS UNCALLED FOR

In the final paragraphs of a Reflection entitled “The bells are tolling for the dollar,” published two months ago, on October 9, I mentioned the climate change problem brought on humanity by imperialist capitalism.With regards to carbon emissions I said: “The United States is not making any real effort but accepting just a 4% reduction with respect to the year 1990.” At that moment, scientists were demanding a minimum of 25 to 40 percent by the year 2020.

Then I added: “In the morning of this Friday 9, the world woke up to the news that “the good Obama” of the riddle –as explained by Bolivarian President Hugo Chavez Frias at the United Nations—had been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. I do not always agree with the positions of that institution but I must admit that, at this moment it was, in my view, a positive action. It compensates the setback sustained by Obama in Copenhagen when Rio de Janeiro, and not Chicago, was chosen as the venue of the 2016 Olympics, a choice that elicited heated attacks from his right-wing adversaries.

“Many will feel that he has yet to earn the right to receive such an award. Rather than a prize to the President of the United States, we choose to see that decision as a criticism of the genocidal policy pursued by more than a few presidents of that country who took that nation to the crossroads where it is today. That is, as a call for peace and for the pursuit of solutions conducive to the survival of the species.”

Obviously, I was carefully watching the black president, elected in a racist country afflicted by a deep economic crisis; however, I avoided prejudiced judgments based on his campaign statements and his position as leader of the Yankee executive.

Nearly one month later, in another Reflection entitled “A Science Fiction Story,” I wrote that:

“The American people are not the culprits but rather the victims of a system that is not only unsustainable but worse still: it is incompatible with the life of humanity.

“The smart and rebellious Obama who suffered humiliation and racism in his childhood and youth understands this, but the Obama educated by the system and committed to it and to the methods that took him to the US presidency cannot resist the temptation to pressure, to threaten and even to deceive others.”

And immediately added: “He is a workaholic. Perhaps no other American president would dare to engage in such an intense program as he intends to carry out in the next eight days.”

As it shows in that Reflection, I analyzed the complexity and contradictions of his long journey through Southeast Asia and I wondered: “What is our distinguished friend planning to discuss during his intense journey?” His advisors had claimed that he would be discussing every issue with China, Russia, Japan, South Korea, and so on, and so forth.

It is clear now that Obama was paving the way for his remarks of December 1st, 2009, in West Point. That day he made a thorough analysis. He carefully chose and produced 169 phrases aimed at pressing the right “keys” that would win him the support of the American people for a certain war strategy. Cicero’s diatribes would pale beside his assumed postures. That day I had the impression to be listening to George W. Bush. His arguments were no different from the philosophy of his predecessor, except for a fig leaf: Obama was opposed to torture.

The main leader of the organization blamed for the terrorist act of 9/11 had been recruited and trained by the Central Intelligence Agency to fight the Soviet troops, even when he was not an Afghan.

Cuba’s condemnation of the terrorist action and other additional measures were made public that same day. We also warned that the way to fight terrorism was not through war.

The organization of the Taliban –a word meaning student—sprang up from the Afghan forces fighting the USSR; they were no enemies of the United States. An honest analysis would lead to the true story behind that war.

Today, it is not the Soviet troops but the US’s and NATO’s that are occupying that country with great violence. The policy that the new US Administration is offering the American people is the same as that of George W. Bush, who ordered the invasion of Iraq, a nation that had nothing to do with the attack on the Twin Towers.

The President of the United States is not saying a word of the hundreds of thousands of people, children and elders included, who have perished in Iraq and Afghanistan or of the millions of Iraqis and Afghans suffering from the consequences of the war, even when they had no responsibility whatsoever with the events of New York. Rather than a wish, the final phrase of his speech, “God bless America,” sounded like an order to heaven.

Why did Obama accept the Nobel Peace Prize if he had already decided to fight the war in Afghanistan to the very end? His cynical action was uncalled-for.

He later announced that he would be receiving the Prize in the Norwegian capital on December 11, and then travel to the Copenhagen Summit on the 18th.

Now, we should expect another dramatic speech in Oslo; a new textbook of phrases hiding the real existence of an imperial superpower with hundreds of military basis deployed all over the world; two-hundred years of military interventions in our hemisphere; and, over a century of genocidal actions in countries like Vietnam, Laos and others in Asia, Africa, the Middle East, the Balkans and elsewhere on Earth.

The problem with Obama and his wealthiest allies now is that the planet they dominate with an iron fist is just falling apart.

The crime against humanity committed by Bush is well known, as he ignored the Kyoto Protocol and failed to do for ten years what should have been done long before that. Obama is not an ignorant. He is aware –as Gore was– of the grave danger threatening us all, but he hesitates and shows weakness vis-à-vis that country’s blind and irresponsible oligarchy. He does not act like Lincoln did in 1861 to resolve the slavery issue and preserve national integrity, or like Roosevelt to cope with the economic crisis and with fascism. On Tuesday, he merely cast a timid stone in the troubled waters of international opinion. The manager of the Environmental Protection Agency, Lisa Jackson, has stated that the threats to the American people’s health and wellbeing posed by global warming make it possible for Obama to take action without consulting Congress.

None of the wars known to history pose a greater danger.

The wealthiest nations will try to place on the poorest ones the bulk of the burden to save the human species. The wealthiest should be asked to make the greatest sacrifices, be most rational in the use of resources and bring a maximum of justice to human beings.

It is likely that in Copenhagen only a minimum of time will be bought to reach a binding agreement that can really help to find solutions. If that were the case, the Summit could at least be considered a modest step forward.